Watch this discussion.Stop watching this discussion.

(28) comments

"Wyoming set its grizzly hunt rules based on flawed information available in January, the groups said in a letter to the state commission and department director Scott Talbott on Monday. Officials have confirmed that the January information was inaccurate and that at least one more female grizzly bear than previously counted died in a key census area..."https://www.wyofile.com/groups-challenge-grizzly-hunt-on-news-of-another-dead-female/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

I would like to see people talk about science and habitat and the facts that there is no need for this hunt , So if this hunt is about money who care's where it is comes from good for the people that want to take pictures and not kill, the pictures could make game and fish more money, it is a drawing good luck

The science, loss of habitat and the facts are why the bears were removed from the ESL. The science, habitat and facts are why a hunt is being authorized. The science, habitat and facts are why grizzlies are soon to be delisted in the northern continental divide. But this sound science is not what you want to believe. You read from these comment sections from people that let their emotions dictate their thinking and reasoning rather than believing the science. You can pay and persuade any scientist to say or do anything you want. Hence global warming. A tri state committee has found that the Bears are suited to be hunted. The feds release them from endangered species status because they are recovered. what part of recovered and to be managed through hunting do you not understand? The Bears that many of these hunters will be pursuing would never be seen through a photographer's lens. The local photographers, who like to prosper off Grand Tetons Wildlife, never leave the roads to do their picture taking.

About the science: deidreAcclaimed Grizzly Bear Biologist, Dr. David Mattson, IGBST 8 years and Yale Professor, stated this month, the 2017 Grizzly Bear Human Caused Mortality Should Nix any Wyoming Hunt in the DMA ... He states, If conserving grizzly bears in the Yellowstone ecosystem were truly a priority, Wyoming would not allow hunting in the DMA, let alone the rest of the ecosystem, especially at a time when human-caused mortality has been skyrocketing as a result of a recent dramatic shift in grizzly bears diets towards eating more human-associated and conflict-inducing meat. Wyoming’s management approach is especially important given that this state has the lion’s share of grizzly bears and grizzly bear habitat in the Yellowstone ecosystem, including lands outside the Demographic Monitoring Area (DMA). These extralimital habitats have become increasingly important as bears expand outward in search of foods to replace those lost to the twin malignancies of climate warming and invasive species. Bark beetles and blister rust have killed more than 50% of the ecosystem’s whitebark pine; invasive lake trout and deteriorating hydrologic conditions have eliminated over 90% of Yellowstone Lake’s cutthroat trout; and a combination of sport hunting, worsening forage conditions, and natural predation have driven a 70% decline in elk populations; all within just a few decades. But instead of being protected, lands outside the DMA have been designated a de facto “Slaughter Zone” by Wyoming within which essentially unlimited killing is allowed—this on top of the explicit state goal of reducing the size of Wyoming’s portion of the population, even inside the DMA. The verdict based upon facts and science: Wyoming's Trophy Hunt is about extirpation and not preservation of the Grizzly Bear. And Women demanding our constitutional rights are upheld, in this case the right for Wildlife Management, management of our treasured natural resources, in the public trust are applauded.

Deidre. Mattson sure isn't the scientist I would have used for the grizzlies defense. This guy is an all out liberal loon who uses the typical Democrat strategy of trying to belittle or demonize a person if they don't agree with him. Yes sir. A page right out of Saul Alinskys book once again. Nobody's sound science holds any merit when all they do is bash Republicans, whites males and anybody else that is not a liberal. Read his recent blog in grizzly times and all you will read is how Trump supporters are all sexist, racist, bigoted, etc. Now, in my mind, this has no place in his so called science. Yale University, like almost all others, are breeding grounds for warping and manipulating young minds into the Democratic socialist party. If you want, I will give you names of several research scientists that have been involved in the interagency grizzly bear team. These are honest, boots on the ground people who don't try using their yale (woo woo) background for a political platform. Now you probably won't like what these people have to say, as they are not going to be bringing up anything political. They will talk about declining white barf pine and increases in human grizzly confrontations though. But you really won't like the cold hard fact that grizzly numbers are increasing both in and out of the DMA. More bears and limited domain are the reason for the States to allow a hunt. Oh, by the way. Wasn't Mattson here in Jackson a while back trying to put fear into everyone's mind about the 2016 election. I vaguely remember an event with him but laughed at his recent blog.

Ken when you call people names, in your comments it is bullying One fact you don't seem to get is there are 500 bears you kill 22 now some are females so it will slow the growth of the bear population going forward you may not want bears in your area but other people do back to that why a DRAWING IS FAIR FOR ALL

Again Mr. Chison, I have to ask what you think drives your views on this subject? If it isn't emotion, please explain. If we prohibited emotion from dictating all of our thinking and decision making, we'd be lost as a society and might as well become totally dependent on computers and artificial intelligence for a meaningful existence.

Watch what happens next Chad. Already talk of maybe opening the season like the wolf, lion and black bear hunts. This will mean that anybody can buy a tag and hunt until the quota is met. With a 48 hour time frame to report your harvest, the number of bears killed will be way higher than the original quota. Thank you to all anti hunters though. Bwahahaha!

Yup! I support this in every way and I LOVE taking an opportunity away from these blood-thirsty (out of state?) head-hunters. Raspberries. I can buy a car, a house, a boat, and multiple snowmobiles and just leave them sitting for 9 months out of the year and pretend I live in Wyoming so, I can buy a bear permit and not use it either. See how SOME things are ok here and others are not? Hypocrites protecting hunting rights bwahahaha - protecting their own pocketbooks, as usual. .

Well Ken, I actually do volunteer for many things and I work with kids almost every day of my life. So your comments really are something that makes me laugh, I don’t have an inheritance and I don’t have any extra money lying around. I work very hard every day just to get by. Just because I don’t agree with the hunt doesn’t mean that I don’t live trying to help others. I grew up in a family that hunted to put meat on the table so I understand hunting with a purpose. But go ahead and accuse me of being some successful liberal that inherited lots of money and looks down on everybody else. You are dead wrong. it’s people like you that make others feel the way we do. I never said I was against hunting if you use the meat or donate it to a charitable cause, and I am friends with many people who do it just because they enjoy it. That’s their choice, just like my choices are mine, it doesn’t make them bad people. And just because I don’t believe in trophy hunting or with this grizzly hunt, doesn’t mean I am any of those things that you accused me of being.

Actually I don't, I don't even have $600 to try and buy one of these tags. Did I ever say I was going to buy one no, I just said I think it's everyone's personal right to purchase one if they want to. And I'm sure that I'll see you donating your $600 to the nearest homeless shelter right? You obviously have a choice because you have an extra $600 that you can use, so maybe you should put your money where your mouth is.

Sure it is okay for someone to purchase a tag and not want to use it. If they are following their heart and doing what they believe in then that is what matters. I presume the reason that some people don't understand that concept is because they look at it like buying a lottery ticket. Why would you purchase a lottery ticket if your intent was not to collect the money in the end if your numbers were drawn? To some of us, it is the concept behind the situation that matters more in this situation. Not everyone agrees in the hunting of grizzly bears or in the number of tags that will be issued, but it is still our right to purchase a tag regardless of whether we intend to kill one or not. In the end when it comes to managing Bears or Wolves, or any other animal, the state of Wyoming will do what they feel they need to do. Some will agree and some will disagree.

Well Julie, I really don't understand your analogy. I would not apply for a permit if I did not intend on using it. If you want to get that warm and fuzzy feeling that you are really doing something beneficial for mankind, why don't you volunteer with Habitat for humanity. Or, better yet, donate that money for your grizzly tag to them. There are a lot of under privileged kids in the valley that probably don't get a meal on the weekends either when not in school. How bout coughing up some of that money for them? Oh, wait a minute. Your hard earned, or inherited money can't be used for that right. The liberals mindset in this valley is all but embarrassing. The way that all you people who think you are so successful look down on everyone else,. Then you will rally together, raising tens of thousands, to try and save a bear, and not give one dime for helping other people. Well, sorry to say, but these bears will be harvested regardless of this.

Boy, do YOU look like a fool lecturing someone on how to be a good citizen in Jackson. Take your Grizzly Guns home with you, please. We are so sick of this killer mindset and your comment about Liberals is SO out of line! We aren't all "liberals" and we aren't very appreciative of your generalizations about people who want this planet preserved and protected from folks such as you - it is YOUR thinking that needs to change here Bud. Condescending to speak to us hurt you much, old white man? Take it home.

Old white man? Boy does your liberalism shine through. So, you think that everybody that hunts is old and white? Talk about racism! Sorry to tell you, but, the Bears are going to be killed regardless. And, you can head up to Montana and start your liberal mindset there because those bears are about to be pulled off the endangered species list also. We will be hunting these bears from now on in Wyoming Idaho Montana parts of Washington and it will be hunted again in British Columbia. Sorry to tell you that bad news. But it's really not all bad. With hunting being used as a tool to control their numbers, the bear populations are going to be all right. Don't worry. Your zoo bears in the park are not going to be killed. Just real bears in the wilderness that none of you out-of-staters or people from all over the world have ever seen or ever will see. I spend a lot of time in the wilderness areas of Wyoming and Idaho and have yet to see anybody back there packing just a camera. Like your local photographers here in the valley, they only go after the zoo bears that are right off the road. Too much work for the photographers to get back into the real country where real bears live

Mr. Chison, her point is that you could do the same thing you're suggesting to her. Why don't YOU use your $600 on doing something beneficial to mankind instead of trophy hunting? Your suggestions are nothing but hypocritical.

There is definitely no law on the books that says he's people cannot apply for a license. But, what these people do not understand, is that the Bears will be harvested regardless. What is the difference of a hunter killing a bear or Wildlife officials killing the Bears? Now, with this supposed resistance, the game and fish will have no option but to make the season's longer and leniant. This means that because of this tactic, the bears will probably be hunted in the spring time now over baits. Also, it is pretty easy to change the regs and simply allow more hunters in the field at a time. I would bet a paycheck that not one of the resistance coughed up the 600 or 6000 dollars to save a bear outside the monitoring areas. This is nothing more than a bunch of drama Queens vying for attention. Take your trust fund donated money and help to build affordable housing in the valley, for less fortunate people, than wasting it on your resistance. What day is the protest at the Town square anyhow?

Ahhhh.. you're losing this argument world-wide. Just so you know. There is no reason at all to kill these bears except that you want to sell a hunting trip to some naive greenhorn - money motive clear here. Take it home

It is definitely ok to want to preserve America's iconic grizzly, rather than destroy it. Nearly every scientist who has gone on record in this debate has stated they feel the delisting was premature, and that grizzlies are still vulnerable. Why on Earth the state of Wyoming doesn't realize that a living bear is going to keep bringing people back to WY over and over, with renewable economic value, while a dead bear's economic value is a paltry, one time transaction, is beyond me. Wildlife viewing tourism is second only to resource extraction in Wyoming-it is an economic juggernaut for the state. Killing off one of the biggest draws the state can lay claim to is just plain foolhardy. Shoot 'em with a camera!

100% OK. As a matter of fact, these people are doing all of us a huge favor, especially the Grizzly. The Grizzly gets to live and not be betrayed by the human race and we all get to see and coexist with these magnificent creatures. It's amazing how humans say it's not okay for a Grizzly to kill a human, but a human can kill a Grizzly with no issue. Now, they are selling tags to make a profit from it....Is that fair? I think Grizzlies have the right to kill every one of us, especially knowing what is being plotted against them. Good Luck Griz! I'm definitely on your side!

Hunters and non-hunters are applying for a Grizzly Hunt tag, with a choice to trophy hunt with a camera, or not at all. Possibly 100's of the public now have new Sportsman ID's, and are registered in Wyoming as part of a growing number of constituents who want to become more involved in a new narrative of wildlife management. There is obviously a "shift" taking place in the value of our wildlife on our public landscapes, and we should all be able to address this change, and embrace it. It's time.

The issue here is that at this time there is no other way for a large sector of our population regarding how wildlife is managed to be heard. Thus, this is the only available method. Change needs to come to how these Wildlife agencies are funded so that they reflect a democratic process. Wildlife are in the public trust for all to enjoy, not just a tiny sector of hunters and trappers.

Absolutely it should be ok. If the contention is to provide revenue, then this accomplishes that. We hunt with a camera, and leave behind the "trophy" for the rest to enjoy. Killing grizzlies for sport and a trophy is simply senseless waste.

It should be OK and most agree, according to this poll...I would imagine more wildlife watchers would buy a tag than a hunter...I sure hope so...We who love wildlife and want to see them alive, not dead, would like our voices to be heard and would be willing to buy a tag to save a grizzly!!!